Background: There are limited data on the use of bivalirudin for chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
Methods: We compared CTO-PCIs performed using bivalirudin vs unfractionated heparin in the Prospective Global Registry for the Study of Chronic Total Occlusion Intervention (PROGRESS-CTO; NCT02061436). The primary endpoint was net adverse cardiac events (NACE), defined as major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and vascular complications.
Results: Between 2012 and 2022, a total of 73 of 9723 procedures (0.75%) were performed using bivalirudin. The J-CTO score (2.4 ± 1.2 vs 2.4 ± 1.3; P=.73) and the PROGRESS-CTO score (1.4 ± 0.9 vs 1.2 ± 1.0; P=.31) were similar in both groups, and the retrograde approach was used less often in the bivalirudin group (15% vs 30%; P<.01). Procedural success (89% vs 85%; P=.35), in-hospital NACE (1.4% vs 2.1%; P>.99), incidence of MACE (0% vs 0.76%; P=.64), and vascular access complications (1.4% vs 0.9%; P=.48) were not different between the 2 groups. On multivariable analysis, use of bivalirudin was not associated with an increased risk of NACE (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-7.27).
Conclusion: Bivalirudin is infrequently used during retrograde CTO-PCI. While the incidence of adverse events was similar with unfractionated heparin, larger studies are needed to assess the safety of bivalirudin.
Keywords: chronic total occlusion; percutaneous coronary intervention.